Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.

To answer the original question, wouldn't it be necessary to identify specific achievements and the misery caused by pursuing them? Perhaps it is an invalid question. What about this: Are the achievements brought about by humans in answer to the misery suffered sufficient? No matter the answer, they (the miseries) existed, so perhaps the achievements are mere necesssities. Good food for thought at the very least. I view achievement as well as misery to be specific to an individual rather than to society or humans as a whole. The misery created is often offset by the joy we bring, and one's sense of achievement is tainted by one's own sense of failure. The answer? Whatever gets you through.

Getting rid of the criminal banking & monetary system outlined in these documentaries will be mankind's greatest acheivement

I agree entirely. We ought to do to the banks what Christ did to Satan...reject their offers and turn our backs to them. They need us ...We don't need them. Their "money" is only as good as we think it is and, speaking for myself, it is utterly worthless and I don't want it. I'd rather trade fairly and privately with my fellow man. Fortunately, there are more & more people doing exactly that every day.

But the problem there is that a society that tries to throw off the current debt servitude system will tend to find itself either being invaded or having its monetary unit devalued rapidly and hyperinflation occuring

And lets be realistic here. The chances of a GLOBAL passive non compliance occuring is about as probable as the pope staring in a bestiality porno extravagansa with billy graham, Gordon brown and Geirge Bush

If you havent seen them before they are seeds manufactured mainly in western countries that because of genetic modifications can be patented and/or copyrighted

They were marketed on claims they will grow better in rough conditions than non GM seeds and that theyre more resistant to bad weather, insects, disease etc etc as well as yielding more in harsher conditions some of which might be true

What WASNT pointed out though was that it was illegal for farmers to collect seeds from the crop to plant next season because they are the intfellectual property of the company they bought them off, plus many have been genetically modified to produce infertile seeds anyway

Ontop of that the regime of (also patented) pesticides you HAVE to use for them to grow properly have a tendency to pollute the soil so that only the GM crops will grow for a while afterwards so it trapped farmers into dependence on those crops AND having to buy the seeds from the same companies each year

At which point they started increasing the price of the seeds and pesticides needed to grow them

This has resulted in thousands of small farmers going out of business at which point large farming conglomerates buy up their land for next to nothing

So all over the world areas and even some entire countries have banned the use of GM seeds and in India, Pakistan and some other asian countries a new regime of locally trading produce has sprung up in the wake or our attempts to lock the third world into seeds slavery

That said though, its not a mindset that could be expanded very far until televisions, cars, toasters, mobile phones and clothes can all be grown from genetically modified seeds on the next farm over

So it can only be used for "some" things and in quite small amounts

As for the "miracles", as I said. The way the current system is set up if any country DID look like succeeding in overthrowing the system the world banks and other international cartels would be able to completely collapse that countries monitary unit in a matter of days no matter how big the country is

And once that had been done once the media in other countries would be able to dissuade people from trying the same thing there

So it would need to be fairly global, at least as far as the industrialised nations were concerned

I don't disagree that we have our issues with the way we treat the planet.I would put computers up there as positive things and of course the microchip.

Human learning is growing because of the internet.

There are unfortunate portions of it such as a direct focus on ourselves (me i me me me i talk)when social media came around but if it gets people online it is a less guided tour than television, I like to believe.

You wouldn't be able to ask questions to people around the world in real-time like this one if these computers weren't all routed together. It is the largest network of computers anywhere.

There will be a time when an entire generation has no clue what it was like not to have search engines and information at their fingers, shopping, blogs, up to date news and everything in between. This wasn't just a change like records to cds - this was the world opening up and saying - come, talk to me, look at me, think about me.

I don't know if it has changed you but I love the internet and would never give it up. I remember life without it - having to go to a library to research even the dullest question and good luck on a statistical question that no one wrote a book on or your particular library didn't have. Now within 5 minutes I can have an answer if the question has been asked before. Of course, it's up to me to judge the sources of the information but it would be the same with a book. Just because someone wrote it - it doesn't mean that it's true anymore than if they typed it.

And to top it all off we have a systematic information and distraction bombardment that stops most people from maintaining focus on anything for very long no matter how important it might be due to information and distraction overload

So I think in many ways people "know" far less than they used to even though in a purely quantative measurement it could be claimed they know more

But its the quality rather than the quantity of knowledge thats important, the acuracy rather than the quantity too.

Knowing a snippet of fractionally truthful drivel about 10,000 things isnt really of much value to anybody

Whereas knowing 50 topics acurately, in depth and from a multifaceted perspective is of far more value

infact even knowing one thing to that level is worth more than the 10.000 snippets in any real social sense

I would even question the increase in human learning to be totally honestAlthough some describe the current era as the "information age" is it really?What might far more acurately describe it is the "disinformation age"

Not only is the media nothing more than the biggest propoganda machine in history but we also see socialised education playing its part in the conditioning of young minds tooIntricate social issues have a tendency to be dumbed down to a worthless level and presented as an "either/or" type of choice with the "or" being painted as a bad option

You would have to give examples of any of these for me to understand what you mean. I see blogs as an easy way to voice non-popular thoughts. Our posts here weren't moderated by the government and scanned for free-thinking. Where are you noticing the restriction?

And to top it all off we have a systematic information and distraction bombardment that stops most people from maintaining focus on anything for very long no matter how important it might be due to information and distraction overload

Are you talking about ads? What are you considering as something causing ADHD.

So I think in many ways people "know" far less than they used to even though in a purely quantative measurement it could be claimed they know more

But its the quality rather than the quantity of knowledge thats important, the acuracy rather than the quantity too.

Knowing a snippet of fractionally truthful drivel about 10,000 things isnt really of much value to anybody

Whereas knowing 50 topics acurately, in depth and from a multifaceted perspective is of far more value

infact even knowing one thing to that level is worth more than the 10.000 snippets in any real social sense

I don't agree on this because even the smallest bit of information could be important for survival but you don't know it until you get in the situation. Take the person that reads about how to gather rain water in a plant and which leaves are edible on plants in their region and only learn about a few. If the crumbling of society came - this person might find one food to eat and have potable water. They didn't have to know the totality of botany or know about water purification to come out ahead. They only needed to know what let them continue.

ANY knowledge however small is always valuable. Knowing things in depth may be good for conversation but doesn't help if you don't know the right things at the right times. I don't downplay the jack of all trades and master of none. People on Jeopardy know a lot about what might be considered useless info and certainly not specialized or in depth - are they worse off for it? Most people would consider them smart especially if they win some money from it.

Say I can speak english well. The best person ever at it. My grammar and spelling are supreme. Am I better off than someone that can sort of speak 15 languages when it comes to social interaction. They have more reach than me even though I am better at them than something. I don't see the outcome better there either. It's always the person that knows a little about lots of things that can contribute or get involved in more ways than the person that chooses to focus on a single thing in depth.Isn't it the main reason employers cross-train people.

You would have to give examples of any of these for me to understand what you mean. I see blogs as an easy way to voice non-popular thoughts that aren't rising against free-thinking. Our posts here weren't moderated by the government and scanned for free-thinking. Where are you noticing the restriction?

Blogs are an "after the fact" occurence, and its on those that you can see the social conditioning that has already taken place

A common example would be where one person says something like "all immigration should stop" and another calls them a racist, even though their suggestion was addressing ALL immigrants of ALL races and was therefore equalitarian in its gist and was nationalist rather than racist

But when the term racist is used in a demonising fashion regularly, and equally so in an innacurate manner over time that starts to influence how likely people are to express or even hold a view that has been demonised even in an innacurate fashion

Another more recent example would be that its "unpatriotic" to question the government. And yet until recently criticising and even opposing unpopular political aims was the epitome of being "patriotic" as it puts the country and its people above all else, even the wishes and whims of the elected officials

Are you talking about ads? What are you considering as something causing ADHD

To get what I mean there you just need to look at how many people are more interested in whether some air head celebrity is getting shagged by some other irrelevant nobody, or who is likely to win the final of celebrity rehab nobodies on ice with no x factor dancing in a jungle compared to how many are "bothered" if a thousand people die in a earthquake in some third world country they have never heard of

The last bit kind of overlaps the previous answer too

The "information" that is most sought through our advanced electronic repository of knowledge of the universe very often boils down to which celeb is doing whch celeb, which video of dancing cats is the funniest, what bunch of inbred chavs will be on Dr Phil and what footballer is having an affair etc etc etc ad nauseum

As for things being dumbed down into moronically oversimplified things you can really take your pick there

Practically any governmental decision that the people are highly likely to object to will get that.

The banker bail out being a good example infact. The two choices being martial law before the weekend OR giving the banks a blank cheque to do what they want with and without any form of oversight or accountability

Although all that was really put forward was "martial law and total nationwide collapse OR sign this and everythng will be just peachy again"

A more social example would be the classic rape depiction.

its "always" about power and control apparently.

Lets just ignore the fact that consentual sex is ALSO pretty much always about power and control too as we wouldnt want to cloud the issue.

So its a bit like saying that because all cars that are involved in accidents have wheels, brakes and mirrors that accidents MUST therefore be caused by brakes, wheels and mirrors

Most people know iraq invaded kuwait, very few know that Sadam hussein petitioned the UN and various other bodies for years before invading because Kuwait was trying to bleed his oil fields dry before the country was back on its feet after the Iran/Iraq war. And invaded when all political avenues failed due to him being ignored

The UN weapons inspectors prior to the invasion also categorically said Iraq WAS totally adhering to the requirements of the UN, but both the US and UK leaders were saying the complete opposite despite having access to the UN weapons inspectors reports

Volume of information is irrelevant.

Content and who controls the content on the other hand is VERY important

Blogs are an "after the fact" occurence, and its on those that you can see the social conditioning that has already taken place

A common example would be where one person says something like "all immigration should stop" and another calls them a racist, even though their suggestion was addressing ALL immigrants of ALL races and was therefore equalitarian in its gist and was nationalist rather than racist

But when the term racist is used in a demonising fashion regularly, and equally so in an innacurate manner over time that starts to influence how likely people are to express or even hold a view that has been demonised even in an innacurate fashion

Another more recent example would be that its "unpatriotic" to question the government. And yet until recently criticising and even opposing unpopular political aims was the epitome of being "patriotic" as it puts the country and its people above all else, even the wishes and whims of the elected officials

Blogs don't have to be after the fact. I think you are talking about blogs where someone gives their opinion on world events. Those do exist but they aren't the totality. There are blogs on learning too. I have a blog that is private but shows testing that I've done for others to learn things from. People blog about video games or animals - whatever interests they have. Plenty of people blog about their daily lives and funny things that happened during the day. None of those are going to be rife for racism to be accused.

I think it's the TYPE of blogs you are reading that give you the impression they are all experiencing it. Ones on politics or world events but it's just like speech. People have strong views there too and words like that have been tossed around. No one says that speech should be quieted or isn't beneficial.

To get what I mean there you just need to look at how many people are more interested in whether some air head celebrity is getting shagged by some other irrelevant nobody, or who is likely to win the final of celebrity rehab nobodies on ice with no x factor dancing in a jungle compared to how many are "bothered" if a thousand people die in a earthquake in some third world country they have never heard of

Again, we choose what we digest. I can only see something creeping in on me that I haven't looked for via ads. If I don't visit TMZ how can I be swayed by what they have to say. We don't have to be driven to read about celebs, people do it via their own will. They fantasize that those people live better lives and they want to live those lives through them. If I don't seek that out - it can't affect me.

I'm not sure on the earthquake statement if you mean that we are less bothered than we should be or more when world disasters happen. My personal opinion is that we are more bothered than we should be. There are about 3500 deaths from car accidents every month but you don't hear anyone crying for those victims because they didn't happen all at once. People die every day. Natural disasters aren't any more unfortunate - we can't control those - we can control cars. Take the almighty 911 and hurricane katrina - less people died in either of those than happen EVERY SINGLE MONTH in car accidents but no one is having a national holiday for those that weren't killed all at once. I can't understand that at all - our nation says that if it's in bulk you died a hero's death, if it's all alone you aren't worth remembering.

I didn't send any money to Haiti - am I a bad person? My country is ahead of theirs and I want it to stay that way. Some of them rape babies because they think it will cure aids. America way too often gets involved in everyone's business while we have homeless people roaming the streets and turn our eyes from them. Veterans of wars with no one to tell their stories to. Social security isn't even going to be around for my retirement and I've paid into it my entire working life. How about we take care of our own and stop worrying about all the countries that call us greedy capitalist scum anyway no matter how we help them. My state was labeled a federal disaster area - did Haiti do anything for me after the tornados blew through? We went weeks without power and I continued to go to college through it - didn't miss one day.

Of all the crap we have going on the internet is by far the best thing helping us learn things - judge them as dirty,wrong, or right but we are exposed to them in ways we never had access to in previous times.

As it stands, Earth is the only location in the entire known universe to harbor life. So it follows that the only chance life has to continue existing in this universe -- past the "lifespan" of Earth's nearest star -- is for intelligence to flourish and develop.

So, that. To give life a fighting chance in the cosmological timeline.

.......KNOWLEDGE......unfortunately mankind is not mature enough for this knowledge to flourish. We know what has to be done so lets get it done...clean up the act....educate yourself, no ones going to do it for you. Or you can live in the shell the system has created for you. Or we can restructure the system to meet the needs of everyone. Only then will the misery end. Unfortunately the PTB don't like that idea. I guess they come first.